About your Search

20121222
20121230
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11
taxes. if the goal is to reduce the deficit, their goal of cutting taxes is not relevant to that goal so there's no overlap of potential agreement here. that's why there's no deal. >> let's take a listen to a very conservative retiring senator said, soon to be former senator joe lieberman, who is respected and seen as a deal maker. what we need right now is a deal. let's take a listen to something he just said. >> if we allow that to happen, it will be the most colossal, consequential act of congressional irresponsibility in a long time, maybe ever in american history. >> joy, i think what he's saying there and going over the cliff is not that this would be the worst thing congress has done on an objective scale, but the notion of doing something so bad for no reason is pretty frustrating, isn't it? >> i disagree with his characterization it would be the most irresponsible thing. i think messing around with not raising the debt ceiling and risking the default on the american debt was probably the most irresponsible thing we've seen this congress do, but the thing we need to remember, thi
, the thing we're trying to avoid, the actual danger to the economy, is that we will get too much deficit reduction too quickly. if reducing the deficit was what the economy needed we could go right off the cliff and leave it there. you can see it in this graph, that line going down. that is the fiscal cliff, we went over our deficit problems, gone baby, totally, totally gone. one thing the fear of the fiscal cliff shows by the way, in the fox hole, everyone's a kinsian. everyone agrees. that is number one. too much austerity way too quickly. president obama is not asking for that much in taxes. it's worth getting a bit of perspective in here. you'll be shocked to know, we got a graph for that. here's what happens if we go over the cliff. you get more than $5 trillion in tax increases off the bat. and now here's what happens if we pass the sainted simpson bowles plan. you've heard of the plan. they have 2.6 trillion in tax increases. president obama's latest offer to john boehner has 1.2 trillion in taxes. that is half as much, less than half than simpson bowles, and less than a quarter o
trillion in deficit reduction. we need to stabilize the debt and work it down is a package of about $4 trillion over ten years. here we are today, december 19, and these law changes which i referenced earlier, the end of the bush era tax cuts, the dreaded sequester, across the board cuts of $1.2 trillion in spending will begin to take effect the first of next year. the good news is the white house and republicans have been trading proposals and at least yesterday appeared to be moving closer together. i would have much preferred that they would be talking about a bigger package than they've discussed but nonetheless to reach a package that would resolve some of these issues would be an important step forward and i think help promote certainty that would be important to our economy. on the revenue side of the equation, i just want to remind you what it's taken in the past to balance the budget. we hear talk on average revenue is in the 18% of g.d.p. range n. getting back to average you will should be sufficient. the problem with that is we have never balanced the budget in the last 50 y
program run a billion deficit in 2012 . as the program brought in over 725 billion in cash and spent more than it earned it is costing 773 billion. >> julia: and you are surprised. benefits reached over 8 million and 820,000 in increase in november . so something shady is going on here. >> you used the word shady . i think that is a pretty good word to use. definition of who is disabled is expanded over the yearrs and recently, as you have a massive rise in unemployment and work force clinking and clearly some people are taking the disability option as opposed to staying in the work force. you can call it shady or financially unfortunate but it is happening. we never had as many people on disability ever before. >> clayton: republicans have a look at entitlement programs and we are trying to reign in the excessive spending. >> there are no serious cuts from president obama. there is serious effort at reforming. medicare and medicare. a lot of people don't say social security is enment. it is an insurance program. but it is enormous amount of money flowing out than in and it is getting wor
their deficit and we cannot, the world will switch to euros. there is a tweet here -- guest: the cbo is supposed to be a political, but it cannot be too alarmist. if we go over the cliff, we are looking on january 1, some of this is already milton. about $600 million -- $650 billion in spending cuts and tax increases. that is about 4% of gdp. that is an enormous negative stimulus. a detraction from demand. that would surely be a deep recession. the cbo relies on simulation models that did not take into consideration investor sentiment, the reaction of consumers, and so forth that they wholly lose confidence in their government. if we go over the cliff and stay there, people will start to conclude that washington cannot manage its affairs. all bets are off on economic modeling. it is impossible to say what happened that other than it would be very negative. host: one piece that you actually did right has this headline -- take the idea of a recession next year. with the perspective of everything else going on, when a recession look like? guest: it depends on how we get there. if we have a fiscal c
and deficit reduction. that is an achievable goal. >> today's meeting is the first with the president since november 16. sign for republicans that mr. obama has not really been pushing that hard for a deal. >> we need presidential leadership on in the just taxing rich people. >> three words the president did not use. he did not use the word sequester and he didn't say "debt ceiling" either. he focused most of his remarx on preventing taxes from going up. there are also massive spending cuts coming. no idea how they will avert that. he also did not mention the debt ceiling. earlier they wanted lifting the debt ceiling included. now it's clear it's not in the short-term package that guarantees if they get a short-term deal here, we have major budget battles coming. >> the key to any good negotiation each side has to give up something. near and dear to their heart. what is it, as succinctly as you imagine, both sides have given up? >> both sides say the president started on threshold of tax cut of $250,000. negotiations with boehner he moved to $400,000. not if you have for boehner. he wanted
security came from a sound economy. he was a deficit hawk. he controlled government spending and package. his famous speech warning against military-industrial complex came at the end of his presidency but, in fact, he been working on it all a long. mostly behind the scenes. heaven help us, he liked to say, that we'll get a president who knows less about the military than i do. this approach to the military was not just about the economy. in the berlin crisis in 58-59 and in early crisis with korea and vietnam in 1953, 54, the almost straight, the suez crisis in 1956, eisenhower was playing a bigger game for higher stakes. a west point cadet and a young army officer, ike had been a great poker player. indeed, he was so good that he had to give it up. he was taking too much money from his fellow officers and it was hurting his career. he switched to bridge, but he never forgot how to block it with the soviets he bluffed with nuclear weapons. as only a real warrior can, ike hated war. seriously, the great war hero had never been in combat. in world war i had been stateside training troops
real national security was from a sound economy. he was a deficit hawk, boy, we could use him today, who controlled government spending and taxes. the famous speech warning against the industrial complex was at the end of the presidency, but worked on it all along behind the scenes. heaven help us he liked to say when we get a president who knows less about the military than i do. it was not about the economy or saving money. in the berlin crisis and earlier crisis with korea and vietnam in 1953 over the strait in 1954-55 and 1958 in the suez crisis in 1956, he was planning a bigger gain for higher stakes. west point cadet and young army officer, ike was a great poker player, and, indeed, so good, he had to give it up. he was taking too much money from the fellow officers hurting his career. he switched to bridge, but he never forgot how to bluff. the soviets, he bluffed with nuclear weapons. as only a real warrior can, ike hated war. curiously, the great war hero was never in combat. in world war i, he was training troops to his great chagrin, and world war ii, he was too valuable
a little bit more in taxes to help reduce the deficit. it was rejected by his own party, and so then he sent his members home on vacation. i'm over on the senate side right now, they are in session. speaker boehner let the house members go, so first he walked out of the talks with the president, and then he sent everybody home on vacation. obviously we need to have compromise. the senate bill that passed out of the senate many, many weeks ago had compromise. it was passed by republicans and democrats. all we're asking is that speaker boehner hold a vote on that bill. i don't know why he's afraid to even hoet a vote. hold a vote. that is allowing the process to work, allow democrats and republicans in the house to dash. gregg: he said they already voted on a plan to extend all the tax cuts. >> but they had a vote in the senate on that plan and they voted it down, and then on a bipartisan basis they passed another bill. gregg: 0 out of time. thanks for taking a few moments to be with us. it's good to be with you. chris van hollen. patti ann: former president george h.w. bush remains in in
to reduce the deficit and then double it, do you think the american electorate was cognizant of the fact that obama doubled in it instead of cutting it in half? why don't the american people care about the debt of the united states of america? guest: i do think they care about it. the economy is the number-one issue. guess what? then it comes down to things like jobs. then you come to the debt. it is not that americans are out of touch with the idea that the government is spending more money than we are taking in. there is lots of concern about whether or not the chinese is holding our debt. so, americans are very concerned and that the question is how you go about addressing this problem -- are very concerned. the question is how you go about addressing this problem. president obama and the democrats are saying we have a combined problem both in terms of not sufficient taxation and also we have to have cuts in spending. we have to do the cuts in spending over time because you do not want to endanger a very fragile economy. to respond directly to your question, why do i think the elector
to people in united states of america who are in need of help, or help reduce the deficit that was testified to be the greatest national security threat to the united states of america. it is a matter of priorities. i appreciate the very noble -- i emphasize the word noble -- effort to help people who are in harm's also way in various parts of the world. my colleague from florida mentioned somalia. certainly in vietnam we tried to do the noble things. we're in a different financial reality. in the absence of a national security interest in the congo, i am afraid that sequestration will force us to retract even though we may wish to the contrary. i yield back the remainder of my time. >> a couple of questions. sequestration is not only obama's, but also our responsibility. i believe we voted for it. >> i did not vote for it. >> we talked about this whole issue. it has been suggested that perhaps -- >> $80 million. is that more or less correct? [indiscernible] >> we will hear that in a few moments. if that is correct, i would point out that this really is a national security issue for america
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11